Association of endovascular therapy of very small ruptured aneurysms with higher rates of procedure-related rupture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: Procedure-related rupture during endovascular therapy of intracranial aneurysms is associated with a mortality rate of more than one third. Previously ruptured aneurysms are a known risk factor for procedure-related rupture. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether very small, ruptured aneurysms are associated with more frequent intraprocedural ruptures. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study in which the investigators examined consecutive ruptured aneurysms treated with coil embolization at a single institution. The study was approved by the institutional review board. Very small aneurysms were defined as < or = 3 mm. Procedure-related rupture was defined as contrast extravasation during treatment. Univariate analysis with the Fisher exact test and the Mann-Whitney U test was performed. RESULTS: Between August 1992 and January 2007, 682 aneurysms were selectively treated with coils in 668 patients. Procedure-related rupture occurred in 7 (11.7%) of 60 aneurysms < or = 3 mm, compared with 14 (2.3%) of 622 aneurysms > 3 mm (relative risk 5.2, 95% confidence interval 2.2-12.8; p < 0.001). Among cases with procedure-related rupture, inflation of a compliant balloon was associated with better outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale Score > or = 4) compared with patients treated without balloon assistance (5 of 5 compared with 7 of 16; p = 0.05). Death resulting from procedure-related rupture occurred in 8 (38%) of 21 patients, and a vegetative state occurred in 1 patient. Clinical outcome was good in the other 12 patients (57%). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular coil embolization of very small (< or = 3 mm) ruptured cerebral aneurysms is 5 times more likely to result in procedure-related rupture compared with larger aneurysms. Balloon inflation for hemostasis may be associated with better outcome in the event of intraprocedural rupture and merits further study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".